Should there be vaccine passports?

Should there be vaccine passports?

  • Yes

    Votes: 100 41.2%
  • No

    Votes: 100 41.2%
  • Yes for only for big crowd functions (like holidays + festivals)

    Votes: 43 17.7%

  • Total voters
    243
D

Deleted member 897712

Guest
Ed Davey is opposed to Vaccine Passports. I can't make up my mind on it, some things seem logical like holidays abroad and festivals.
 
D

Deleted member 438547

Guest
Voted no, but that doesn't truly express the extent of my feeling of how vile an idea they are.
 

Tourista

Well-known Member
Certainly for foreign travel I see them as a way forward.

But as of today the government have not even released any info on how they could function in a domestic setting other than put the onus on individual owners/publicans if they want to institute the idea....
 

Roimata

Active Member
I can't answer this because I agree with them in theory but I need more detail as to what places they would include and the big question of what would happen about people that can't have the vaccine.
 

Allymiff

Standard Member
Not sure really. Which private company is the contract to produce them going to sold to ? Will they access my medical data ? How much will I have to pay for a vaccine passport ?
 

Aetius

Banned
Igoring any human rights issues, who the hell believe the Tories - and Crapita by default - could run the scheme?

Get a tatoo on your forhead with the jab, they'd still get it wrong.
 

Allymiff

Standard Member
Igoring any human rights issues, who the hell believe the Tories - and Crapita by default - could run the scheme?

Get a tatoo on your forhead with the jab, they'd still get it wrong.
Ah come on. I’m sure Matt Hancocks got a mate / neighbour who could have a go at it.
 

John

Moderator
The problem will be if the private sector makes the decision. No business is going to want to be 'known' as a Covid hotspot, so if ROAR is in play, they may be within their rights to ask for proof, just like asking for ID to prove age. It's when that starts that the GOVT is probably going to have to step in to regulate. Whether they want to or not
For Travel, it's fair game. It's already a requirement for a lot of the planet, its just another box in the vax passport we have already with hep, acwy and something else in it that I forget (that I had, all expired now i would think)
 

Simplyobsessed

Active Member
The problem will be if the private sector makes the decision. No business is going to want to be 'known' as a Covid hotspot, so if ROAR is in play, they may be within their rights to ask for proof, just like asking for ID to prove age. It's when that starts that the GOVT is probably going to have to step in to regulate. Whether they want to or not
For Travel, it's fair game. It's already a requirement for a lot of the planet, its just another box in the vax passport we have already with hep, acwy and something else in it that I forget (that I had, all expired now i would think)
For international travel it is almost certainly going to be in effect, but I disagree with you on what the response of businesses will be. Cases and deaths are coming right down, vaccinations are going to keep deaths/hospitalisations down and people quickly become complacent. In that context I don't think it will make economic sense for most businesses to willingly choose to turn away paying customers.

I don't have much hope for the eventual vaccine certificate app either, it's going to be Government run so will probably be a buggy mess that is unusable half the time.
 

edz

Active Member
Firstly I've had the az first shot so no antivaxer here.

Regardless of the uses intended or trust I have in the present administration (spoilers, it's very, very little) I don't trust any government now or in the future, not to misuse it, dilute or currupt it into something else. That much potential lovely location data... Mmm, maybe just one bite for profiling.

So no, this shouldn't happen domestically. At all. Ever.

That being said when I was a kid you needed proof of shots for some holidays in your physical passport so maybe that could just be brought back. For the pub, cinema, restaurants... No way.
 

Res

Active Member
Domestically, not until everyone has been offered the vaccine, even then it shouldn't be required for essentials, such as shopping. There would also need to be exemptions for people that have a medical reason for not having the vaccine.

For international travel, it will be taken out of our hands, as it will be up to the country people are visiting whether we need one or not.
 
Last edited:

Belzok

Well-known Member
If their weren't so many antivaxxers we wouldn't even be talking about this :(

It is entirely dependent on reaching herd immunity with our vaccination schemes, and given Facebook that might not end up being as good as it should be.

If we keep on getting spikes and hotspots then inevitably we are going to need something to ensure those who refuse the vaccine, not exempt, can't kill anyone.

Can't come back from death.
 

edz

Active Member
Problem is you then segment society after decades of bringing in legislation to absolutely prohibit such a thing, it's unavoidable regardless of what you and I think about risks antivaxxers create and raise in society. It's not the same as having to have a driving license or have a jab before working in a high risk area despite what the press has been pushing, those are choices and the licensing requirements are known in advance you must have a license to operate a vehicle, fly etc, you must have precautionary jabs before working with risky material (CDC, WHO etc) medical people should know and understand that. Here we're talking about discriminatory practices by definition.

It is, quite literally, a statement of being "unclean" and unfit to enter or use a facility or publicly available business or service. International travel is different, always has been and can easily be retrofitted for Covid vaccinations in the same way the 70's saw other requirements for booster or inoculations before travel.

Domestic restrictions would require either the suspension or amendment of discrimination legislation or will see places who demand such proof (as part of their existing right to refuse service) facing being dragged to court and attempting to prove an individual was refused entry on the grounds of risk - nearly impossible on a person by person basis.

The fact this government hasn't thought that through does not surprise me in the slightest, cf the pushback on CPS prosecution of Covid "laws".

So what of right to refuse entry which is, of course, held by all business premises?

Without for one moment dropping into the rights and wrongs of choices made by hotel, restaurant or pub and other business owners, how many such cases have been highlighted in the media on grounds of sexuality, religion or race over the past few years? A fair few - now imagine if people are refused a hotel stay or a restaurant meal because of a medical reason meaning they can't take the vaccine and their choice being to not go or being forced to medically prove that exposing their health records to a business.

If we want society to treat itself as non discriminatory it cannot tolerate "backdooring" any kind of societal grading or segregation, you simply can't allow discrimination based on vaccinations or testing. To do so, even flipping the process so you only need id if you haven't had a vaccine (e.g. those who cant tolerate one) is segregation and therefore discrimination.

Going down the road of discrimination by health for generally available services is not a good place to go. With the most angelic government ever (which this one is most definitely not) it opens the door to places other less scrupulous regimes later on may take it. It's also most likely going to fall foul to enforced medical procedures laws brought in to prevent WWII style medical atrocities, preventing people using services, buying food, going out without having a procedure or vaccination is, by definition, to force that procedure onto the public or to curtail their rights.

So I say again unless the government changes the law (which I very much doubt it has the nerve to try as it would surely fail) if left up to individual business this will lead to court cases on discrimination which they will most certainly lose.

It will also be the first thing those who rally against IDs (and indeed the very people this is about - Antivaxxers) will coordinate to attack. Business will end up paying the price for yet another poorly thought out scheme which will lead to them facing legitimate and targeted court case after court case as well as having to hire security to check and refuse entry.

International vaccination stamps, fine, they've been accepted for decades. Changing domestic law to prevent access to anything by medical proof, absolutely, definitely not.

Ultimately this is going to be about risk appetite, we won't reduce risk to zero regardless of the Chris Whittys' of the world. We can mitigate it, we can be responsible, where possible we can and should reduce our own risk exposure and reduce the risk we pose to others, that's it.

Ask yourself this, before Covid, before we all became aware of the risks of a previously ignored cough or sneeze around us, how many thought anything of going to a pub or cinema with a bad cold and not worrying of those in the auditorium or bar that may be immunosuppressed or susceptible to Flu etc. I'd hazard everyone here - or at least the majority, same as the number who went to work, on buses etc with flu rather than call in sick.
 
Last edited:

Tourista

Well-known Member
What form will the passport take, will you be issued with an actual card?
That's the $240000 dollar question.

Problem is, as it stands none of us can do anything but guess. Yes, it may be smartphone based, but unless the government are prepared for a sh!t storm of protest from those who will not use one it wont go well for them.

Really a two tier approach would be more sensible, with those who do not want a smartphone or do not trust them could be issued with a paper certificate. Again, both have their good and bad points, you just have to hope when they get issued the kinks are ironed out.....
 

Field Marshall Eccles

Active Member
The first question is what would such a passport be required for and where would it be valid and for how long. Thereafter it is who would it be issued to and how and what about those who can't be vaccinated for a valid reason or have not taken up the chance to be.

There is also the issue of being vaccinated doesn't afaik mean you can't contract the virus and pass it on.
 

acatweasel

Distinguished Member
Problem is you then segment society after decades of bringing in legislation to absolutely prohibit such a thing, it's unavoidable regardless of what you and I think about risks antivaxxers create and raise in society. It's not the same as having to have a driving license or have a jab before working in a high risk area despite what the press has been pushing, those are choices and the licensing requirements are known in advance you must have a license to operate a vehicle, fly etc, you must have precautionary jabs before working with risky material (CDC, WHO etc) medical people should know and understand that. Here we're talking about discriminatory practices by definition.

It is, quite literally, a statement of being "unclean" and unfit to enter or use a facility or publicly available business or service. International travel is different, always has been and can easily be retrofitted for Covid vaccinations in the same way the 70's saw other requirements for booster or inoculations before travel.

Domestic restrictions would require either the suspension or amendment of discrimination legislation or will see places who demand such proof (as part of their existing right to refuse service) facing being dragged to court and attempting to prove an individual was refused entry on the grounds of risk - nearly impossible on a person by person basis.

The fact this government hasn't thought that through does not surprise me in the slightest, cf the pushback on CPS prosecution of Covid "laws".

So what of right to refuse entry which is, of course, held by all business premises?

Without for one moment dropping into the rights and wrongs of choices made by hotel, restaurant or pub and other business owners, how many such cases have been highlighted in the media on grounds of sexuality, religion or race over the past few years? A fair few - now imagine if people are refused a hotel stay or a restaurant meal because of a medical reason meaning they can't take the vaccine and their choice being to not go or being forced to medically prove that exposing their health records to a business.

If we want society to treat itself as non discriminatory it cannot tolerate "backdooring" any kind of societal grading or segregation, you simply can't allow discrimination based on vaccinations or testing. To do so, even flipping the process so you only need id if you haven't had a vaccine (e.g. those who cant tolerate one) is segregation and therefore discrimination.

Going down the road of discrimination by health for generally available services is not a good place to go. With the most angelic government ever (which this one is most definitely not) it opens the door to places other less scrupulous regimes later on may take it. It's also most likely going to fall foul to enforced medical procedures laws brought in to prevent WWII style medical atrocities, preventing people using services, buying food, going out without having a procedure or vaccination is, by definition, to force that procedure onto the public or to curtail their rights.

So I say again unless the government changes the law (which I very much doubt it has the nerve to try as it would surely fail) if left up to individual business this will lead to court cases on discrimination which they will most certainly lose.

It will also be the first thing those who rally against IDs (and indeed the very people this is about - Antivaxxers) will coordinate to attack. Business will end up paying the price for yet another poorly thought out scheme which will lead to them facing legitimate and targeted court case after court case as well as having to hire security to check and refuse entry.

International vaccination stamps, fine, they've been accepted for decades. Changing domestic law to prevent access to anything by medical proof, absolutely, definitely not.

Ultimately this is going to be about risk appetite, we won't reduce risk to zero regardless of the Chris Whittys' of the world. We can mitigate it, we can be responsible, where possible we can and should reduce our own risk exposure and reduce the risk we pose to others, that's it.

Ask yourself this, before Covid, before we all became aware of the risks of a previously ignored cough or sneeze around us, how many thought anything of going to a pub or cinema with a bad cold and not worrying of those in the auditorium or bar that may be immunosuppressed or susceptible to Flu etc. I'd hazard everyone here - or at least the majority, same as the number who went to work, on buses etc with flu rather than call in sick.
You have to ask yourself what happens if the next one is Smallpox, Spanish Flu or Ebola.

Do you think we currently have vaccination as a requirement for health workers (we don't).

If I'm infected by a health worker who has refused vaccination what then? Who do I sue?

Would your arguments be useful for countries that are combating yellow fever and the like?

I'm not too bothered about about vaccine passports for pubs, but believe anyone not vaccinating without good reason needs action taken against them where they put others at risk.
 

Doctor Wibble

Active Member
I don't like the term 'vaccine passport'. I have my ancient battered WHO book of vaccine certificates that is noted as being relevant to my passport but it is not a passport, even if lots of it is written in French.
Separate to this I have a more modern vaccine record which does have brand names and stickers and reference numbers which would be the one where I staple in my 'covid card'.

I have no problem with countries asking for these as they don't want us clogging up their hospitals but I do have a problem with having to have something like this just to buy or do something the government has decided is 'non essential' this week.
 
Last edited:

edz

Active Member
You have to ask yourself what happens if the next one is Smallpox, Spanish Flu or Ebola.

Do you think we currently have vaccination as a requirement for health workers (we don't).

If I'm infected by a health worker who has refused vaccination what then? Who do I sue?

Would your arguments be useful for countries that are combating yellow fever and the like?

I'm not too bothered about about vaccine passports for pubs, but believe anyone not vaccinating without good reason needs action taken against them where they put others at risk.

I completely understand your viewpoint but do remember vaccines wont stop people being a carrier, nor will holding a valid test result as you could be a carrier immediately after giving the test and being exposed unless tests are given and processed at door immediately - good luck with selling that and managing queues while still enticing customers.

If anything this is likely a false sense of security as was track and trace.

Health workers have some mandatory requirements but, you are completely right they (apart from by age group) don't even have an option for Covid vaccines yet, that's a separate point of contention to me and not joined up thinking for the reasons you raise.

My point wasn't that anyone should refuse btw, it's up to the individual - low risks to the vaccine vs their personal risk to exposure and the health care they'd need in that case - its socially responsible to have it unless there's a medical reason not to but what of those who can't have it? Are their social lives now over until herd immunity in 18 months, 2-3 years? An exemption certificate if offered is just a legality to allow a potentially unvaccinated individual in, in which case the whole idea is pointless.

Insisting on smart phones will decimate business of that there's no question, if its insisted on - despite being vaccinated, following and agreeing with a lot of social distancing and, yes, having a smartphone - I won't be using businesses who roll it out even if that means supermarkets and shops only for me. That means a lot of my money stays with me and I don't imagine I'm alone, I did the same with track and trace, if it was needed I didn't go bar the barbers. There's either a huge risk out there in which case I'll stay away thanks, or there isn't in which case I'm not going along with normalising this (and yes I wear a mask / social distance AND am vaccinated).

Ebola etc - I get your point, but in those cases there are very few asymptomatic carriers so if you have it you know and all others do, if there's an outbreak its immediate and obvious. Its simpler to isolate and quarantine - its Asymptomatic or long-incubation low symptom infections that pose the risk - exactly what we see with Covid.
 
Last edited:

edz

Active Member
That's the $240000 dollar question.

Problem is, as it stands none of us can do anything but guess. Yes, it may be smartphone based, but unless the government are prepared for a sh!t storm of protest from those who will not use one it wont go well for them.

Really a two tier approach would be more sensible, with those who do not want a smartphone or do not trust them could be issued with a paper certificate. Again, both have their good and bad points, you just have to hope when they get issued the kinks are ironed out.....
Just a point as someone who's had their first jab you do get a card saying what you had and when (in the case of the first one also when the second one is due).

As to the fact you can't really mandate a smartphone (as was the case with track and trace) there'll likely be a response of either 'sorry businesses you can go swivel for customers' or alternately fall back on offering a card or certificate (which you then have to trudge to the pub/cinema/restaurant and could be knocked up with photoshop and card) that starts to show the mess this idea is.

Don't forget the fiasco that started with the NHS app as well (edit it had nothing to do with the NHS I would point out) - end edit), a fake one came out almost immediately (I grabbed and decompiled it - it was the real one with the guts removed and the display information left in and NO I didn't use it.) If the government thinks that a fake web app showing full vaccination wont be built then they're even more stupid than they seem (which is really saying something).
 
Last edited:

edz

Active Member
The first question is what would such a passport be required for and where would it be valid and for how long. Thereafter it is who would it be issued to and how and what about those who can't be vaccinated for a valid reason or have not taken up the chance to be.

There is also the issue of being vaccinated doesn't afaik mean you can't contract the virus and pass it on.
Correct, ONS, PHE and Even Mr Whitty have said it multiple times. Vaccines do not stop asymptomatic carriers - arguably worse than symptomatic carriers who are easier to stop at entry or identify in society.
 

LV426

Administrator
Staff member
So how about this as an idea, applicable once everyone has had their vaccination opportunity:

1: The vaccination certificate/passport/etc (name unimportant) is issued either
a) to those who have been vaccinated
b) to those with a medically certified contra-indication (i.e. a genuine exemption on medical grounds). This would include (for example) youngsters if a decision is made to, say exclude them until they reach a certain age.
It doesn't matter what physical form/s it takes as long as they are secure enough to hugely restrict forgery. It might be several (eg as with rail tickets).
Thus - no discrimination.

2: Freedom of choice:
  • you can choose whether or not to accept the vaccine.
  • but also - the operator of a business can exercise the same freedom of choice over who s/he serves/admits/etc.
  • as a potential customer I then have the freedom of choice as to which businesses will or won't see my trade*


==============================
* Just for openness: "Hello, I'd like to book a table. Do you operate a vaccine certificate policy?" "No". "OK, cancel that then. I'll go elsewhere."
 

The latest video from AVForums

Toy Stories - Turning Toys into Blockbuster Movies
Subscribe to our YouTube channel

Latest News

AVForums Podcast: 4th August 2021
  • By Phil Hinton
  • Published
KEF adds Ci160ES to Architectural Speaker range
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Hisense increases Laser TV sales following Euros
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Samsung Smart Start offer grants access to premium TV apps
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
DS Audio launches third generation DS003 optical cartridge
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published

Full fat HDMI teeshirts

Support AVForums with Patreon

Top Bottom